Literature DB >> 25486341

Investigating pristine inner experience: implications for experience sampling and questionnaires.

Russell T Hurlburt1, Christopher L Heavey2.   

Abstract

We argue that inquiring about directly apprehended ("pristine") inner experience requires four overlapping methodological characteristics: effectively limiting investigation to specific, clearly identified moments; effectively limiting investigation to pristine experience; bracketing presuppositions; and iteratively acquiring skills. We compare and contrast Descriptive Experience Sampling (DES), other (non-DES) experience sampling methods, and questionnaires and conclude that whereas non-DES sampling methods and questionnaires appear to inquire about pristine inner experience, they fall short on all four methodological counts and therefore might be better understood as investigating an ill-defined mixture of presuppositions, judgments about experience, and pristine experience itself. Typical experience sampling studies and questionnaires can be valid and useful, but their validity and utility does not (or at least does not necessarily) arise from their phenomenological fidelity.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Descriptive Experience Sampling (DES); Experience Sampling Method (ESM); Experience sampling; Inner speech; Introspection; Presuppositions; Pristine inner experience; Questionnaires

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25486341     DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.11.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conscious Cogn        ISSN: 1053-8100


  16 in total

1.  Experience Sampling of Positive Affect in Adolescents with Autism: Feasibility and Preliminary Findings.

Authors:  Megan Kovac; Maya Mosner; Stephanie Miller; Eleanor K Hanna; Gabriel S Dichter
Journal:  Res Autism Spectr Disord       Date:  2016-07-15

Review 2.  Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology.

Authors:  Ben Alderson-Day; Charles Fernyhough
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2015-05-25       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  The Effect of Training on Participant Adherence With a Reporting Time Frame for Momentary Subjective Experiences in Ecological Momentary Assessment: Cognitive Interview Study.

Authors:  Cheng K Fred Wen; Doerte U Junghaenel; David B Newman; Stefan Schneider; Marilyn Mendez; Sarah E Goldstein; Sarah Velasco; Joshua M Smyth; Arthur A Stone
Journal:  JMIR Form Res       Date:  2021-05-26

4.  Testing the construct validity of competing measurement approaches to probed mind-wandering reports.

Authors:  Michael J Kane; Bridget A Smeekens; Matt E Meier; Matthew S Welhaf; Natalie E Phillips
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2021-04-09

5.  Assessing the accuracy of self-reported self-talk.

Authors:  Thomas M Brinthaupt; Scott A Benson; Minsoo Kang; Zaver D Moore
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-05-06

6.  Inner experience in the scanner: can high fidelity apprehensions of inner experience be integrated with fMRI?

Authors:  Simone Kühn; Charles Fernyhough; Benjamin Alderson-Day; Russell T Hurlburt
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-12-09

7.  Individual Differences in Frequency of Inner Speech: Differential Relations with Cognitive and Non-cognitive Factors.

Authors:  Xuezhu Ren; Tengfei Wang; Christopher Jarrold
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-11-02

Review 8.  Can Inner Experience Be Apprehended in High Fidelity? Examining Brain Activation and Experience from Multiple Perspectives.

Authors:  Russell T Hurlburt; Ben Alderson-Day; Charles Fernyhough; Simone Kühn
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-01-27

9.  What goes on in the resting-state? A qualitative glimpse into resting-state experience in the scanner.

Authors:  Russell T Hurlburt; Ben Alderson-Day; Charles Fernyhough; Simone Kühn
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-10-08

10.  Exploring the Ecological Validity of Thinking on Demand: Neural Correlates of Elicited vs. Spontaneously Occurring Inner Speech.

Authors:  Russell T Hurlburt; Ben Alderson-Day; Simone Kühn; Charles Fernyhough
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-02-04       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.